Topic: Discoveries, not presets, and the future of sleep

I feel the need to start this thread--about sounds that don't really rise to the level of presets, since they may just involve one or two changes,and are more first steps for further edits than final edits.

Like the old C2 Chamber with the reverb off and the sound set to Binaural, with the head brought in closer and moved slightly to the left, and the Sound speed brought down very low, which seems to bring the piano in closer (I thought it might do the opposite, since the sound would reach the listener faster, but it instead seems to let the sound linger close by.) Lots to do from there, but just these few changes create an interesting point of departure.

Which really worries me. Has anyone actually done the math, yet? With around 35 parameters, each with say 50 steps, for acoustic pianos, and seven acoustic pianos (counting the Erard, the Bechstein, and the ones we can load from the previous versions), and ignoring the eq and velocity and mic settings, how many possible variations of the piano can we now create, and how many hours of lost sleep will these cost us?

Re: Discoveries, not presets, and the future of sleep

In third year engineering, I took six math classes, four of which were statistics (also took three engineering classes - bad year for sure).

Fortunately?? I forget how to do this, and didn't keep my texts.

But you really don't want to know the number of combinations available.  You would likely win the lottery before you assessed each combination.

Rather daunting isn't it?

This potential complexity bothers me, so I just rely on the programmers that have real pianos to listen to and have better ears than do I, and I just use the presets with some small adjustments like mic or headphone placement in addition to making the piano 2.90 metres long (9.5 ft).

Glenn

__________________________
Procrastination Week has been postponed.  Again.

Re: Discoveries, not presets, and the future of sleep

Well, I went ahead and created, and uploaded to the file site here, a version of the old C2 Grand called, unfortunately, Grand C2 Chamber Close Strong EQ'ed. Still a draft, really, but I'm having some fun with it.

Quite a few revisions on the C2. I'm finding it has good dynamics, though it may take some time to get used to: may seem fairly muted at first, but it sounds good for jazz and opens up well with more velocity and some big gospel chords in the middle. Notice it's meant for headphones.

A very few words about one setting: I shifted the head to the left to get a bigger, but not thunderous, bass. Remarkable how much difference that makes. (Derived from Ethel Caffie-Austin's lessons on gospel piano--she urges sitting to the left of center.) This slight edit also seems to bring out the fairly crisp sympathetic resonance on the upper bass notes.

Last edited by Jake Johnson (26-02-2009 12:51)

Re: Discoveries, not presets, and the future of sleep

Jake Johnson wrote:

Well, I went ahead and created, and uploaded to the file site here, a version of the old C2 Grand called, unfortunately, Grand C2 Chamber Close Strong EQ'ed. Still a draft, really, but I'm having some fun with it.

Quite a few revisions on the C2. I'm finding it has good dynamics, though it may take some time to get used to: may seem fairly muted at first, but it sounds good for jazz and opens up well with more velocity and some big gospel chords in the middle. Notice it's meant for headphones.

A very few words about one setting: I shifted the head to the left to get a bigger, but not thunderous, bass. Remarkable how much difference that makes. (Derived from Ethel Caffie-Austin's lessons on gospel piano--she urges sitting to the left of center.) This slight edit also seems to bring out the fairly crisp sympathetic resonance on the upper bass notes.

1.  I'll try your sound out.

2.  I agree that the new C2 takes some getting used to - I'm slowly coming around, but must admit that I'm playing with the volume curve - I find there is "too much" in the bass, and not enough in the treble.  But that's likely due to my ears (so I've cranked up the treble linearly from G5 to +7dB at C8).  To me this sounds more like the 2.3 C2 Chamber.

3.  The Binaural is very dependent on the head location.  From the sitting position to standing "over the strings" is a huge difference.

__________________________
Procrastination Week has been postponed.  Again.